Comments on: Inside the Nonprofit: Who Gets the Credit? http://directpointgroup.com/donorinsite/2006/10/23/inside-the-nonprofit-who-gets-the-credit/ Fundraising News, Information and Blog for Nonprofit Organizations Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:08:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: Duke Smith http://directpointgroup.com/donorinsite/2006/10/23/inside-the-nonprofit-who-gets-the-credit/#comment-4 Tue, 24 Oct 2006 04:00:31 +0000 http://directpointgroup.com/donorinsite/2006/10/23/inside-the-nonprofit-who-gets-the-credit/#comment-4 Randy, I so agree with you about having the "right" communication and reporting strategy...rallying the troops...to work smartly together and make it all about the donor and the MISSION of the organization. Thank you for such a thoughtful and spot-on comment. Wow. Randy, I so agree with you about having the “right” communication and reporting strategy…rallying the troops…to work smartly together and make it all about the donor and the MISSION of the organization. Thank you for such a thoughtful and spot-on comment. Wow.

]]> by: Randy Fisher http://directpointgroup.com/donorinsite/2006/10/23/inside-the-nonprofit-who-gets-the-credit/#comment-3 Tue, 24 Oct 2006 02:23:36 +0000 http://directpointgroup.com/donorinsite/2006/10/23/inside-the-nonprofit-who-gets-the-credit/#comment-3 This is a very interesting article, and thanks for posting it. I see potential conflict with a number of areas, starting with the marketing department / or function. In some respects, they might be the first point of contact with a 'big' donor re: something they heard, were given or attended an event. Depending on the organization, communications efforts themselves may not be sufficiently organized - or even valued - whether they are online or offline! And, there may not be the appropriate tools. And also, even when the function is valued + the right tools are being used, they may not even be measuring the right thing! It all comes down to design, I believe. Silos of course, are not uncommon in most organizations. Just look at how we hire people. We don't hire them for their 'relationships', but really what we consider to be their 'functional expertise'. Most functional areas have their own specific terminology, 'language', code of conduct, culture really. There are the soft-type skills in bringing disparate groups together, and building a bit o' trust and mutual understanding. There is also a structural component -- to ensure that a person's performance evaluation and overall compensation takes into account their contribution to the achievement of a specific metric / ROI. This is a complex issue without easy answers. My sense is that there's a fair bit of education that has to go on here, as well as internal discussion as to how to best spread out the kudos. In my experience, as nonprofits move towards greater 'accountability'. there is a very real danger that individuals in all functions spend too much time 'reporting' ~ trying to justify their particular position / programs. It's largely based on the fear that the funders will cut the funding, or simply not renew or donate. The smarter thing to do of course, is to rally the troops from all departments and devise a communication & reporting strategy that further reinforces to their donors that they are working smartly together, and not simply covering their asses. To my mind, that would go much farther in developing stronger donor relationships ~ isn't that the objective? ~ and contribute more significantly to organizational capacity, stability and sustainability. This is a very interesting article, and thanks for posting it.

I see potential conflict with a number of areas, starting with the marketing department / or function. In some respects, they might be the first point of contact with a ‘big’ donor re: something they heard, were given or attended an event.

Depending on the organization, communications efforts themselves may not be sufficiently organized - or even valued - whether they are online or offline! And, there may not be the appropriate tools. And also, even when the function is valued + the right tools are being used, they may not even be measuring the right thing! It all comes down to design, I believe.

Silos of course, are not uncommon in most organizations. Just look at how we hire people. We don’t hire them for their ‘relationships’, but really what we consider to be their ‘functional expertise’. Most functional areas have their own specific terminology, ‘language’, code of conduct, culture really.

There are the soft-type skills in bringing disparate groups together, and building a bit o’ trust and mutual understanding. There is also a structural component — to ensure that a person’s performance evaluation and overall compensation takes into account their contribution to the achievement of a specific metric / ROI.

This is a complex issue without easy answers. My sense is that there’s a fair bit of education that has to go on here, as well as internal discussion as to how to best spread out the kudos. In my experience, as nonprofits move towards greater ‘accountability’. there is a very real danger that individuals in all functions spend too much time ‘reporting’ ~ trying to justify their particular position / programs. It’s largely based on the fear that the funders will cut the funding, or simply not renew or donate.

The smarter thing to do of course, is to rally the troops from all departments and devise a communication & reporting strategy that further reinforces to their donors that they are working smartly together, and not simply covering their asses. To my mind, that would go much farther in developing stronger donor relationships ~ isn’t that the objective? ~ and contribute more significantly to organizational capacity, stability and sustainability.

]]>